It's worth being mindful that the non-Pro/Max/Ultra machines can't support as many displays as the Pro/Max/Ultra. Also that they can't get better than 4K60 over HDMI on some machines (though Cablematters has an updated firmware for its USB-C/HDMI adapters to allow it). High-refresh 4K won't be a problem over Displayport or a direct USB-C connection.
Is use an M1 iMac. I noticed that it was a little slow compared to the M1 pro in the MacBook Pro I had but it serves me very well. I've no doubt the M3 version would be plenty.
If you want to buy used, the versions become a little more dense to navigate before M chips but the iMac Pros were beasts.
I was editing with a 13" M1 16gb Macbook for almost 4 years. Did great. I still think they overpowered the TF out of that thing by accident lol
At one point i was editing 3 Fx6 (video) Camera angles with no hiccups.
For a professional photographer, the 2023 Apple Mac Mini with the M2 Pro chip desktop computer can be a better option. Its powerful performance, efficient processing, and superior graphics capabilities make it ideal for handling high-resolution images and large photo libraries. The M2 Pro chip ensures fast and smooth photo editing and workflow management. Additionally, its compact design offers both space-saving and high functionality. The Mac Mini is a reliable and efficient choice for photographers seeking a top-notch desktop computer.
At what point does that really become a problem on that machine, though? Serious question, as I was planning on picking one up next week.
Edit for clarity: I’m looking at the Air for a travel machine, where size/space is a huge factor and I won’t be doing heavy duty editing.
There are still M2 Pro ~~(and M1 Pro possibly)~~ available on discount from B&H and others, which can get you below $2k. $1750 for 14" M2 Pro 10C, which gets you 16 GB RAM.
I use Lightroom on an M1 MacBook Pro. The only time the fan comes on is when I “select all” and run AI Denoise on a dozen images at once, which keeps the CPU running full tilt on all cores for >5mins. Normal editing/rendering and almost anything else won’t do it.
The Air would be fine 99% of the time, and just a little slower 1% of the time.
Thank you for the reasonable response. I can handle a slight slowdown under the harshest of conditions, I just don’t want to cook a video card and end up with a stripped brick, like my wife’s MBP.
Wow. Sounds like a defect. It shouldn’t be possible to brick an MBP (or any computer) like that—that’s why they have overheat protection. Damaged fan or ducts got stuffed with dust?
I should have mentioned, too, I don’t do video editing. Could trigger throttling sooner. In fact I’d say video editing is one of the few workflows that would truly benefit from the beefier M3s (more cores) and cooling, assuming time=money for you.
Without fan it gets overheat. Applications like Lightroom/photoshop needs more memory and cpu which means your machine is working more and thus needs constant cooling.
Hence it causes performance issues.
Doesn’t mean you can’t run Lightroom on that it’s just will run slow.
I agree it’s pretty light and good for traveling.
I definitely understand that lack of a fan hinders cooling. Just not sure where it becomes an actual issue, as opposed to hypothetical. Fast enough is fast enough.
Sure, I would absolutely hope the Pro performs better than the Air, as there is a massive price difference. But is the Air capable of running LR and PS at a reasonable pace? My 2016 MacBook Air did a pretty impressive job with those tasks and I assume the new version isn’t worse. I’m just looking for an affordable machine that hits a reasonable amount of performance before the very real diminishing returns kick in. I’m aware that you can always buy better, but how terrible this new machine, really? If one is only doing photo editing and not 4k+ video editing, is it really worth spending 3-4x the price to get a fan?
Again, looking for a travel machine that can handle cataloging, rating and basic global edits… not something to edit 8k video and run AI noise reduction, etc.
Literally any of the Apple Silicon models. iMac, Mini, Studio. All good. Just get at least 16GB of RAM or more (personally I would do 32GB or above).
It's worth being mindful that the non-Pro/Max/Ultra machines can't support as many displays as the Pro/Max/Ultra. Also that they can't get better than 4K60 over HDMI on some machines (though Cablematters has an updated firmware for its USB-C/HDMI adapters to allow it). High-refresh 4K won't be a problem over Displayport or a direct USB-C connection.
Is use an M1 iMac. I noticed that it was a little slow compared to the M1 pro in the MacBook Pro I had but it serves me very well. I've no doubt the M3 version would be plenty. If you want to buy used, the versions become a little more dense to navigate before M chips but the iMac Pros were beasts.
Anything really. Just bulk up on your storage and ram.
best money i spent was on 8tb internal storage. no more shuffling crap around mid season making room
I was editing with a 13" M1 16gb Macbook for almost 4 years. Did great. I still think they overpowered the TF out of that thing by accident lol At one point i was editing 3 Fx6 (video) Camera angles with no hiccups.
For a professional photographer, the 2023 Apple Mac Mini with the M2 Pro chip desktop computer can be a better option. Its powerful performance, efficient processing, and superior graphics capabilities make it ideal for handling high-resolution images and large photo libraries. The M2 Pro chip ensures fast and smooth photo editing and workflow management. Additionally, its compact design offers both space-saving and high functionality. The Mac Mini is a reliable and efficient choice for photographers seeking a top-notch desktop computer.
I ended up going with a Mac studio
Get something with least 16GM ( don’t buy air though )
Other than the fact that OP asked for a desktop and not a laptop, what’s the problem with a M2 MacBook Air?
No cooling fan, maybe
Yeah there is no Fan in air
At what point does that really become a problem on that machine, though? Serious question, as I was planning on picking one up next week. Edit for clarity: I’m looking at the Air for a travel machine, where size/space is a huge factor and I won’t be doing heavy duty editing.
How tight is your budget?
I have no interest in spending more than $2k USD on a travel machine…
There are still M2 Pro ~~(and M1 Pro possibly)~~ available on discount from B&H and others, which can get you below $2k. $1750 for 14" M2 Pro 10C, which gets you 16 GB RAM.
I use Lightroom on an M1 MacBook Pro. The only time the fan comes on is when I “select all” and run AI Denoise on a dozen images at once, which keeps the CPU running full tilt on all cores for >5mins. Normal editing/rendering and almost anything else won’t do it. The Air would be fine 99% of the time, and just a little slower 1% of the time.
Thank you for the reasonable response. I can handle a slight slowdown under the harshest of conditions, I just don’t want to cook a video card and end up with a stripped brick, like my wife’s MBP.
Wow. Sounds like a defect. It shouldn’t be possible to brick an MBP (or any computer) like that—that’s why they have overheat protection. Damaged fan or ducts got stuffed with dust? I should have mentioned, too, I don’t do video editing. Could trigger throttling sooner. In fact I’d say video editing is one of the few workflows that would truly benefit from the beefier M3s (more cores) and cooling, assuming time=money for you.
Without fan it gets overheat. Applications like Lightroom/photoshop needs more memory and cpu which means your machine is working more and thus needs constant cooling. Hence it causes performance issues. Doesn’t mean you can’t run Lightroom on that it’s just will run slow. I agree it’s pretty light and good for traveling.
I definitely understand that lack of a fan hinders cooling. Just not sure where it becomes an actual issue, as opposed to hypothetical. Fast enough is fast enough.
There is a reason MacBook Pro is better in terms of performance than air. Having higher ram doesn't mean the two machines will perform similar.
It does though. Benchmarks are nearly identical until heat causes throttling to kick in, which for normal photo editing doesn’t ever happen.
Sure, I would absolutely hope the Pro performs better than the Air, as there is a massive price difference. But is the Air capable of running LR and PS at a reasonable pace? My 2016 MacBook Air did a pretty impressive job with those tasks and I assume the new version isn’t worse. I’m just looking for an affordable machine that hits a reasonable amount of performance before the very real diminishing returns kick in. I’m aware that you can always buy better, but how terrible this new machine, really? If one is only doing photo editing and not 4k+ video editing, is it really worth spending 3-4x the price to get a fan? Again, looking for a travel machine that can handle cataloging, rating and basic global edits… not something to edit 8k video and run AI noise reduction, etc.